Do the Beltway Media aid in creating the White Backlash Effect?

I wonder.

The white backlash vote is well documented in the history books. It helped hand Nixon two victories in '68 and '72, powered Reagan and Bush 41, and has been the subject of countless stories and political theories. Whether it's the Willie Horton ad, or Nixon's successful use of busing as a campaign issue, white, blue-collar folks--"Reagan Democrats"-- have repeatedly shown anger at what they apparently view as excessively "repentant" philosophies of civil rights and liberal government.

So the question has been posed repeatedly throughout this campaign: is Barack Obama different? When he wins a state like Wisconsin, he clearly is, as he essentially ties HRC in the white and under $50,000 a year vote. When he loses a state like Ohio, he's apparently in deep shit. Especially when exit polls show 20% of voters took race into account (of those who took race into account in Ohio, they went for HRC by a 3:2 ratio, according to the CNN exit poll). Commentators then speculate: is BHO too black? Are they flocking to Hillary because of race or just becuase they like her on bread and butter issues? Their answer: probably both.

So when the Jeremiah Wright controversy erupted, and because these political analysts have been raised in the political journalism tradition of seeking out demographic trends and carelessly fitting them into their ideas of American history, it was suddenly clear: Obama's white support is tanking in the primary, and this will hurt him with white voters in the general. They did not wait for polls to show this. They, instead, predicted, and, indeed, may have contributed to, this process.

When writers say things like (from Politico):

A failure [to address the Wright problem] could leave many of the white independent voters — a key group behind Obama’s swift rise in national politics — doubting whether he is really the bridge-builder and healer he has portrayed himself to be.

...I can't help but feel as if they are helping to make it so. Now, one would argue they have historical bases for their statements, and they do. But the simple fact is that Barack Obama is not every other black guy, and this is not 1988. Media commentators have wondered if he would be "branded" as the Jesse Jackson kind of black politician, and thus far, he hasn't been. But when such moral deference is given to the white backlash voter--essentially, that it's understandable and even defensible if he strays from Obama over his former pastor's comments--it contributes to the racial problem in our politics. This is more than mere analysis. It is a sort of moral "thumbs up" to white voters. It's OK if you get freaked out by the pastor and black guys generally... your fathers did! Why not you?